Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 244 posts

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#231

Post by pfdietz »

weregiraffe wrote: post #203
pfdietz wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's incorrect in that the Standard Model firmed up in the 1970s. But since then, fundamental physics has been nearly stagnant. More broadly, the era of exponentially growing knowledge of the basic foundations of the universe cannot last long. Historically it will be seen as highly anomalous. Most of history will be one of scientific stagnation.

Why not? You don't know how much knowledge the universe contains.

Any exponential growth process runs into fundamental limits soon enough. This is as true in physics as it is in any other field. Accelerators are close to their practical limits, for example.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#232

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

coldtea wrote: post #161
AareyBaba wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' and people were just beginning to understand how heat energy and mechanical energy could be transformed into one another. "He has enlightened our globe from one generation to another without any apparent diminution of strength, and we have formed the instinctive belief that no limit in the past or any in the future can be assigned to his functions. No proof of progr…

> Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' Many languages have gendered nouns. In mine sun is also a "he". It's also common to gender objects when talking about them affectionately or poetically (e.g. talking about a motorcycle as a "she" or a "he").

Just an interesting bit of human psychology: a motorcycle could be either gender as it's strongly analogous to a horse, but a car is always female.

In languages with gendered nouns, objects which can have humans inside of them (e.g. cars, boats, houses) are almost universally female (presumably because females have wombs), and this leaks into English pronouns as well.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#233

Post by tialaramex »

eythian wrote: post #184
corndoge wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP stated because it's warm underground

They also stated > if it was just down to the Sun this place would be uninhabitable which implies surface.

Yup. Bang to rights gov, I was under the impression that insolation isn't enough to do 275K on the surface (ie temperature above freezing) and thus you couldn't really live here, but actually I was wrong.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#234

Post by mr_toad »

eythian wrote: post #184
corndoge wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP stated because it's warm underground

They also stated > if it was just down to the Sun this place would be uninhabitable which implies surface.

I think Kelvin meant that if the Sun was keeping the Earth that warm underground then the surface would be frying.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#235

Post by gerdesj »

coldtea wrote: post #164
thaumasiotes wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (Also, it’s “oblate”. To “ablate” is to erode.) Perhaps, but the item "ablate" in "an ablate spheroid" is obviously not a verb, so it's hard to see how that's relevant. "Ablate" isn't really well-formed for a verb, and indeed I see that the modern verb is a back-formation from the better-formed "ablation". If it had started as a verb, you'd expect "aufer", in the same way that we have the verb "offer" rather than "…

You appear to paint yourself in a corner and then try to talk your way out of it with irrelevant arguments nobody cares about. Just admit that "ablate" was a mistake and be done with it.

I do admit that I hit o instead of a, I have no idea why because I am familiar with the difference between the two words, which are not remotely related in meaning.

I'm gerdesj who actually committed the original mistake and not the other person who dived in.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#236

Post by saagarjha »

a1369209993 wrote: post #119
saagarjha wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was deliberately provocative and I'm glad I was. I've got far better responses as a result. I would tend to argue that this isn’t something we need on Hacker News. (Also, it’s “oblate”. To “ablate” is to erode.)

> To "ablate" is to erode. I mean, it's a ablate sphereoid too, thanks to rainfall, but that's clearly not what they meant.

I think it would be an "ablated spheroid"?

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#237

Post by stevula »

coldtea wrote: post #161
AareyBaba wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' and people were just beginning to understand how heat energy and mechanical energy could be transformed into one another. "He has enlightened our globe from one generation to another without any apparent diminution of strength, and we have formed the instinctive belief that no limit in the past or any in the future can be assigned to his functions. No proof of progr…

> Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' Many languages have gendered nouns. In mine sun is also a "he". It's also common to gender objects when talking about them affectionately or poetically (e.g. talking about a motorcycle as a "she" or a "he").

It’s interesting because English has not used grammatical gender for inanimate objects for quite some time (aside from a few exceptions such as ships). I don’t think I’ve seen the sun referred to as “he” in other 19th century writings.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#238

Post by shalmanese »

gerdesj wrote: post #15

I had absolutely no idea that SA is so old. New Scientist - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Scientist is a mere whippersnapper. It doesn't matter that the article is bollocks. It is reasoned bollocks. That is basically what science is all about! I would prefer if there was some more working shown to back up the article but it seems to imply that some might be available rather than just simple assertions. We live in…

> I had absolutely no idea that SA is so old.

One of my favorite sections of SA back when I read the dead tree version is they would have a page near the front of the journal that highlighted what was the top news in the issues 50, 100 & 150 years prior.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#239

Post by oska »

cosmodisk wrote: post #183
AareyBaba wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' and people were just beginning to understand how heat energy and mechanical energy could be transformed into one another. "He has enlightened our globe from one generation to another without any apparent diminution of strength, and we have formed the instinctive belief that no limit in the past or any in the future can be assigned to his functions. No proof of progr…

What I remember from English lessons at school is that the sun is 'he' and the moon is 'she'.

Was this in classes for English as a second language?

Because, as a native English speaker, this seems like misinformation to me, perhaps partly influenced by your teacher having a first language where nouns do still have gender.

Re: Experts Doubt the Sun Is Burning Coal (1863)

#240

Post by fesoliveira »

rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #232
coldtea wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Interesting to read. The Sun is referred to as 'he' Many languages have gendered nouns. In mine sun is also a "he". It's also common to gender objects when talking about them affectionately or poetically (e.g. talking about a motorcycle as a "she" or a "he").

Just an interesting bit of human psychology: a motorcycle could be either gender as it's strongly analogous to a horse, but a car is always female. In languages with gendered nouns, objects which can have humans inside of them (e.g. cars, boats, houses) are almost universally female (presumably because females have wombs), and this leaks into English pronouns as well.

>... a motorcycle could be either gender as it's strongly analogous to a horse, but a car is always female.

In Brazilian Portuguese, we use masculine pronouns for cars ("o carro"). Same goes for boat ("o barco") and plane ("o avião"). This can also be seen in Spanish ("el coche", "el barco", "el avión").

I believe that the gender these things are referred to in languages with gendered nouns is more linked to the etymology and development of linguistics than psychology, although it is very likely that the later has some influence as well.

Post reply on HN